This whole issue of a conflict of interest and whether his constituents are getting the representation they deserve and expect could have been easily resolved if any of the political parties honoured the pledges they all gave in 2010 to implement a proper power of re-call.

As it is, the opinion of his electorate will become moot, they have no say now and by the time of the next election his constituency will have disappeared. Fortunately so too will Osbourne.

This whole issue of a conflict of interest and whether his constituents are getting the representation they deserve and expect could have been easily resolved if any of the political parties honoured the pledges they all gave in 2010 to implement a proper power of re-call.

As it is, the opinion of his electorate will become moot, they have no say now and by the time of the next election his constituency will have disappeared. Fortunately so too will Osbourne.

Because he had the reputation as an effective shadow chancellor. This was a stupid misjudgment of a mouth in gear, brain in neutral type, not a major error of economics. Plus he was Dave's Bullingdon Club buddy.
Plus, why give the creep Mandelson more satisfaction than he' already had from the situation.

It would probably be better for everyone if more people from the Westminster village lived and worked in the real world.

.

Click to expand...

In the dim and distant past when I studied 'O' level history, we learned that the 1832 Reform of Parliament paid MPs salaries for the first time so they would not have to work outside the house and could dedicate themselves to representing their constituents, and you wouldn't get just the wealthy and landowners in parliament.

If the poor babes can't survive on £74,000 plus the income from family trusts and Osborne & Little, it's a poor do.

I am fundamentally against any "rules" being applied to our MPs... all this does is hand power to officials and party apparatchiks.. we also need to get away from the idea that politicians have any specialist knowledge or abilities.

I don't have a problem with them having other careers or interests, indeed there is probably a good case for them only sitting in parliament for a couple of terms. I would much rather have jobs like the Chancellor and Home Secretary being fronted up by officials, who at least can be hired and fired! The job of Politicians is to make sure the officials are doing a good job!

I may have recalled this tale a few times in the past, but it does illustrate the point...

Scene - early 60s space capsule.. in the capsule is sitting an astronaut and a monkey..

Both are holding their sealed orders... The monkey opens his first, and there are masses of details regarding the launch sequence, setting of boost motors, checking retro rockets etc etc etc..

The astronaut is now getting a bit worried, as if that is what the monkey is meant to do, then what was his task...! With some trepidation, he slits open his envelope and removes a single sheet of paper, on which is written a single sentence:

Feed the monkey!

... I sometimes think that the Politico's forget that, whatever else they do, they need to feed the monkey!

Doesn't matter what the ES position on Brexit is, by any standard there's a clear conflict of interest in a sitting MP being the editor of a newspaper so, for that reason alone, he should be forced to choose between one or the other.

The twats shouldn't have a second job full stop. They get paid well for what they are doing and they should be concentrating on that.

Click to expand...

Most Cabinet members do two jobs, including the Prime Minister. In many cases their Cabinet job consumes more time than the job for which they were elected.

I don't like it, but I'm not sure why becoming a newspaper editor is any worse in terms of time-management than trying to arrange the nation's finances whilst also notionally working for one's constituency.

Most Cabinet members do two jobs, including the Prime Minister. In many cases their Cabinet job consumes more time than the job for which they were elected.

I don't like it, but I'm not sure why becoming a newspaper editor is any worse in terms of time-management than trying to arrange the nation's finances whilst also notionally working for one's constituency.

Click to expand...

I think most people would consider there is a difference between an MP also serving in the Cabinet (an extension of the role they were elected to - forming a government) and an MP with a second job outside government.

I think most people would consider there is a difference between an MP also serving in the Cabinet (an extension of the role they were elected to - forming a government) and an MP with several jobs outside government.

In the dim and distant past when I studied 'O' level history, we learned that the 1832 Reform of Parliament paid MPs salaries for the first time so they would not have to work outside the house and could dedicate themselves to representing their constituents, and you wouldn't get just the wealthy and landowners in parliament.

Click to expand...

The Bullingdon Club was founded at Oxford in 1780 and thus, predates anything brought to law by the plebs in Parliament. George Osborne is a fully paid up cocaine snorting hooker consorting (matter of public record before Carter Fruck start) member of the Bullingdon Club and as such, couldnt give a rats what any of us think as he turns a failed political career into millions of pounds.